In His Final Speech, Murphy Promised Immigrants Support—But Stayed Silent on How
Gov. Phil Murphy pledged support for immigrants but avoided addressing landmark New Jersey immigration bills passed amid rising ICE enforcement.
In his last speech as governor, Murphy set a sweeping vision for what New Jersey was and what it will be.
He spoke about creating the millionaire’s tax, relieving medical debt of almost 800,000 New Jerseyans, and launching Family Connects NJ, a nurse home visitation program for new parents and babies. He celebrated the restoration of funding to pensions and his investments in public education, public transit, and women’s health care
And somewhere in the middle of his speech, he said:
“And to all of our immigrant families, allow me to say the following: I can only imagine how harrowing the past year has been. But rest assured: New Jersey is your home. We have always supported you. And we always will.”
The statement is an improvement from the previous year, where he made zero mentions of immigrant families—just as President Donald Trump was taking office for a second term, and many feared their families would be torn apart (and they were).
But that speech was the only time he mentioned what immigrant families are facing. Now, the purpose of this speech was to recap his last eight years in office, pass the baton to a new administration, and promise a secure New Jersey in an uncertain future. That is no small task.
He made no mention of the historic package of immigration bills passed just the day prior.
Advocates, lawmakers, and immigrant families have spent the last five years—more than half of his tenure in office—fighting to codify a policy put in place by his own attorney general. And they finally came to fruition.
Leading up to that moment, though, the urgency to pass some version of those bills became more dire as ICE quadrupled its detention capacity in New Jersey, with plans to increase it further.
At first, reporters were told that Democratic lawmakers—those in charge of the state Legislature—loved the idea, but that they were fearful of what would happen come the November elections.
As the year went on, I witnessed the aftermath of a Newark workplace raid, one of Trump’s first during his second term. In July and August 2025, ICE conducted two major raids in Edison, detaining 49 people. I saw people afraid to go to work, to shop at stores, to send their kids to school. I spoke to families who feared what would happen to their loved ones when they walked out the door.
And it never mattered what their path was to this country: all were at risk, and all were living in fear.
The elections that Democrats were fearful about came and passed, and they were ultimately safe. In fact, Democrats showed up in historic numbers: voter turnout reached the highest levels for a gubernatorial race in over two decades at about 50% of registered voters. Voter engagement groups reported increased participation in cities like Elizabeth, Passaic, and Perth Amboy, which have large Black and Latino populations.
Some say that momentum was a rejection of Trumpism, especially as it relates to his immigration policy. Though Republicans pointed to Trump’s gains in the 2024 presidential election, when he won more than half of New Jersey’s counties, the November 2025 gubernatorial race told a different story. Predominantly Latino areas that had moved right in 2024 returned to Democrats.
The attention at the state level turned to passing the bill, because the next governor-elect, Mikie Sherrill, would not publicly provide answers about how she felt regarding the main immigration bill that advocates were pushing for. While she indicated her support for immigrant protections, she expressed concern that hard-coded legislation would bring federal attention to the state.
(The attorney general’s directive that the bill sought to codify was challenged by the Trump administration in 2020, but the case was ultimately dismissed.)
In an interview on the same day the bills passed, Murphy told Politico: “The directive has worked, including with Trump-appointed judges. So I do start in a place where, ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.’”
But the main issue is that the directive could be changed at a whim, and we do not know for certain what the next administration will do.
What I have witnessed as a journalist, standing between elected officials and the people, is that the people are looking for those who stand on their principles firmly, and loudly. One could argue that’s what’s made the Republican party so successful over the last 10 years.
The immigration bills passed on Monday ultimately cut up one large bill called the Immigrant Trust Act into three smaller bills, with some changes. They codify the attorney general’s policy but narrow it, allowing local police to cooperate with ICE only when someone has been convicted of certain serious crimes, not just charged.
They also added key sensitive areas where ICE cannot operate—including schools, hospitals, courthouses, shelters, and healthcare facilities—and increased data privacy protections, limiting how state and local government entities and healthcare facilities can gather and retain immigration information.
I’ve been working in New Jersey for 8 years now, so I know enough to know that bills passed are ones that the governor is likely to sign. To be fair, there are exceptions: Murphy has already conditionally vetoed one of the three immigration bills over technical concerns about how healthcare facilities would handle data collection, but hasn’t said anything publicly about the others.
I can’t pretend to understand the diplomatic calculations that politicians make; the political maneuvers and backdoor compromises that are made to get policies out the door. Perhaps not “loudly announcing” the bills will stave off some attention from Trump, and Murphy did say that the state has “not solved all of our problems.”
However, the Trump administration is already aware of the pending legislation. So what could it have meant to the immigrant communities Murphy has “always supported” if he announced his intent to sign legislation to protect them?